Department of Cannabis Control detectives, with Long Beach law enforcement, prepare to serve a search warrant on an unlicensed marijuana store in Long Beach, Calif., on March 5, 2024. Last year California's Cannabis Enforcement Taskforce served more than 300 search warrants on unlicensed operations in the state.
(
Alisha Jucevic for NPR
)
Topline:
In the decade since the first states legalized recreational marijuana, about half the country has moved to allow adults to buy regulated pot from authorized sources. In California, where voters approved recreational pot in 2016, state officials readily acknowledge the industry still operates mostly in the shadows.
Why it matters: California is the biggest example of the unfulfilled promise of a legitimate cannabis market. Some entrepreneurs blame high taxes and start-up costs for licensed producers and retailers. Smaller operators often have trouble getting access to capital, as the continued federal prohibition on the marijuana business makes it virtually impossible for them to tap into traditional financial services.
What is being done about it: In California, the Department of Cannabis Control is now trying to close the gap. It gathers anonymous tips about unlicensed cannabis stores, which operate semi-openly out of storefronts that aren't hard to identify.
A funny thing happened on the way to cannabis legalization: illegal pot is still big business.
In the decade since the first states legalized recreational marijuana, about half the country has moved to allow adults to buy regulated pot from authorized sources. But in some states, that's been more theory than practice.
In New York, which legalized marijuana in 2021, retail sales are dominated by ubiquitous illegal "smoke shops," while the state struggles to license legitimate ones. Governor Kathy Hochul has called the transition "a disaster," and has pledged to crack down on the illegal sellers.
In Maine, the congressional delegation last summer asked the Justice Department for help in combatting illegal cannabis producers, who outnumber the state's licensed operations and are believed to be funded in part by Chinese investors.
Wilson Linares, commander of the L.A. County law enforcement division of the California Department of Cannabis Control, heads to the location to serve a search warrant on an unlicensed cannabis store in Long Beach, Calif., on March 5, 2024.
(
Alisha Jucevic for NPR
)
And in California, where voters approved recreational pot in 2016, state officials readily acknowledge the industry still operates mostly in the shadows.
"The black market is very pervasive and it's definitely larger than the legal market," says Bill Jones, the head of enforcement for the state's Department of Cannabis Control.
California is the biggest example of the unfulfilled promise of a legitimate cannabis market. Some entrepreneurs blame high taxes and start-up costs for licensed producers and retailers. Smaller operators often have trouble getting access to capital, as the continued federal prohibition on the marijuana business makes it virtually impossible for them to tap into traditional financial services.
Wilson Linares, commander of the L.A. County law enforcement division of the California Dept. of Cannabis Control, shows a sampling of the unlicensed cannabis edibles seized from a black market store in Long Beach, Calif., on March 5.
(
Alisha Jucevic for NPR
)
Jones, however, focuses on what law enforcement did — or rather, what it didn't do — in the first few years after the vote to allow a licensed weed industry.
"Most jurisdictions — local jurisdictions — police or sheriff's departments and district attorney's offices, were very reluctant to do any kind of enforcement on cannabis," he says. "It really created an air of impunity, and the unlicensed activity really skyrocketed."
Washington state, by contrast, maintained law enforcement pressure on illegal marijuana after voters legalized pot in 2012, which gave the new licensed industry time to establish itself.
Passersby watch as California Department of Cannabis Control detectives, with support of Long Beach Law enforcement, serve a search warrant on an unlicensed dispensary in Long Beach, Calif., on March 5, 2024. Like many unlicensed cannabis stores, this one is unmarked and still has signage from a previous business. Photo by Alisha Jucevic for NPR
(
Alisha Jucevic for NPR
)
In California, the DCC is now trying to close the gap. It gathers anonymous tips about unlicensed cannabis stores, which operate semi-openly out of storefronts that aren't hard to identify.
"They'll occupy buildings [where] the business itself has moved or is out of business," says Wilson Linares, the DCC's head of enforcement for the Los Angeles area. His officers and local police recently raided a shabby storefront in Long Beach. The sign reads "Flores Cabinets," but inside they find cannabis edibles for sale, as well as loose marijuana flowers, sold in jars — a practice called "deli style," prohibited under California's cannabis regulations.
Linares says some of the unlicensed stores are identified with the green cross emblem, borrowed from the medical marijuana movement that predated recreational stores. Another clue, though, is the level of security. The ostensible cabinet store in Long Beach has a heavy metal door and security grates over mirrored windows.
California Department of Cannabis Control detectives lock the premises after serving a search warrant on an unlicensed dispensary in Long Beach, Calif., on March 5, 2024. The penalty for unlicensed cannabis sales is usually a fine, and officers raid the some addresses over and over.
(
Alisha Jucevic for NPR
)
"One of the biggest things that you can see is the cameras. The building itself is old but the cameras are new. That's a pretty good indicator for us," Linares says.
These raids have ramped up in the last couple of years, especially in Los Angeles. Some of the unlicensed retailers have shifted toward delivery services. But the penalty for getting caught selling unlicensed marijuana is relatively light — usually a $500 fine, unless the person has broken other laws — and Linares says his officers find themselves raiding the same storefronts over and over again.
"These places don't pay taxes, it doesn't help provide services for the people who live around here," Linares says. "And the individuals who run these places, they're often not the best," he says. "Gangs and organized crime."
This doesn't come as much of a surprise to an economist.
Unlicensed cannabis products removed from a black market store in Long Beach, Calif. The products will be destroyed.
(
Alisha Jucevic for NPR
)
"The black market becomes more competitive," says Tiffanie Perrault, a postdoctoral researcher at McGill University in Montreal who studies cannabis markets. She says it's understandable why illegal marijuana expanded in California after legalization.
"You remove risk — because you know, it's legal — so you have more consumers," she says. "And at the same time, your black market is going to react strategically by adjusting prices and levels of quality."
The black market in California also benefits from the restrictions on the licensed competitors, such as the fact that only about 40% of local jurisdictions in California permit cannabis stores. That leaves the other 60% to the retailers who don't wait for official approval.
California cannabis buyers are often unaware of — or indifferent to — the legality of the product they buy, but they do notice prices. Depending on the jurisdiction, taxes on licensed pot can reach 38%.
California Department of Cannabis Control detectives, with support of Long Beach Law enforcement serve a search warrant and remove cannabis products at an unlicensed dispensary in Long Beach, Calif., on March 5, 2024.
(
Alisha Jucevic for NPR
)
"I got a disposable and some edibles," says Camerin Remmington as he exits an authorized store on the edge of town in Riverside. "It's almost 60 bucks for two items. It's a little more expensive here!"
He says he appreciates the fact that the licensed products are tested for quality.
"You know it is what it is," he says. "You can't go wrong with it!"
But with cannabis, legality for its own sake is not a concern for Remmington. He volunteers that he grew it illegally on his land in the high desert during the post-legalization boom a couple of years ago. He says it made money, until police showed up a year and a half ago.
"We got ticketed for it, for having a couple of processed plants, but they didn't catch the bulk of anything," he says. When he showed up for his court date, the case appeared to be a low priority. "They didn't even know who we were!"
Riverside County Sheriff Department Sergeant Jeremy Parsons collects cannabis clippings and firearms from an unlicensed greenhouse in Perris, CA.
(
Martin Kaste
/
NPR
)
Those raids are still happening in rural Riverside County. On a Tuesday morning, the sheriff's department's Marijuana Enforcement Team leads a ten-vehicle convoy through the outskirts of the town of Perris. They're following up on a tip about a house hidden at the end of a private drive. The operation commander, Sgt. Jeremy Parsons, comes out to the main road to report that it is, indeed, an illegal grow.
"When we went up to the house we could smell marijuana. We found a greenhouse in the backyard which contained a few hundred small marijuana plants," he says. They also found guns, and they run the names of two people on the site to see if either one is a felon, and not allowed to have a firearm.
"There's not a lot of criminal consequences [for illegally growing marijuana]," Parsons says. But the strategy here is to try to charge growers with other crimes — that's why the convoy of vehicles was so long, as it included people from California Fish and Wildlife, the local water board and even code inspectors.
"That's what we're charging these people with: water contamination, pesticides that are illegal, the fertilizers that are illegal. That's where we're getting people," says Riverside Sheriff Chad Bianco.
But for Bianco, the bigger issue is legalization itself. He's against it, because he believes it encourages the illegal pot farms in the hills of Riverside County.
"It made it worse. One hundred percent, it made it worse," he says.
A big problem, as he sees it, is exports. California has become a major exporter to states where marijuana is still illegal — and fetches a higher price — despite the warning from the Justice Department back when legalization got started that the states that legalize pot should make sure to keep it inside their borders.
Bianco says the marijuana gold rush has attracted Mexican drug cartels and Asian human smuggling rings.
"I mean, we've had multiple, multiple homicides, we've had multiple kidnappings, we've had multiple reports of human trafficking and rapes and the punishments that go with not doing your job — and it's all related to this," Bianco says.
Back at the DCC, Bill Jones says he thinks legalization was, as he puts it, "imperative," but he also believes it should be possible eventually to curb the black market.
"I think it's doable. But it's going to take a lot of resources and consistent enforcement over years to get our arms around this," Jones says.
President Donald Trump has escalated his efforts to influence American elections, signing an executive order that the White House says seeks to create a list of confirmed U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state and use the U.S. Postal Service to "verify" mail ballots are for voters.
Why it matters: Trump has long railed — baselessly — about widespread illegal voting by noncitizens and mail voting fraud. The executive order comes as Trump's Justice Department is seeking sensitive voter data from states, and is engaged in more than two dozen lawsuits for that data. The administration claims it needs the data to enforce states' voter list maintenance. The order also comes as Trump pressures Republicans in Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, a sweeping election overhaul that would impose new voter identification and documentation requirements. That bill is stalled in the Senate due to Democratic opposition and the legislative filibuster.
What's next: Trump said he believes the order is "foolproof." But election experts have already said the order — which was first reported by The Daily Caller — would face immediate legal challenges.
Updated March 31, 2026 at 19:43 PM ET
President Trump has escalated his efforts to reshape American elections, signing an executive order that seeks to create lists of U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state, and instructs the U.S. Postal Service to play a larger role in states' mail voting programs.
Trump said in the Oval Office Tuesday that he believes the order is "foolproof" and may or may not be tested in court. But election experts said the order was unconstitutional and prominent voting rights attorneys quickly threatenedto sue to block the order from going into effect.
A previous executive order on elections, signed about a year ago, has been blocked by federal judges who said the president lacked the constitutional authority to set voting policy.
The Constitution says the "Times, Places and Manner" of federal elections are determined by individual states, with Congress able to enact changes.
Trump has long railed — baselessly — about widespread illegal voting by noncitizens and fraud with mail ballots. The new executive order — which was first reported by The Daily Caller — takes aim at both.
The order instructs the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration to "compile and transmit to the chief election official of each State a list of individuals confirmed to be United States citizens who will be above the age of 18 at the time of an upcoming Federal election and who maintain a residence in the subject State."
The executive order comes as Trump's Justice Department is seeking sensitive voter data from states, and is engaged in more than two dozen lawsuits for that data. The administration claims it needs the data to enforce states' voter list maintenance. Federal judges in three states have dismissed the Justice Department's lawsuits in those states.
In another case, a DOJ official admitted in court last week that the department plans to share that data with the Department of Homeland Security, to run it through the so-called SAVE system to search for noncitizens.
Trump's order also targets mail voting, claiming that "additional measures are necessary" to secure voting by mail – a form of voting he has used himself but has also maligned for years. In the 2024 general election, nearly a third of voters cast mail ballots.
The order says that a state's mail voters should be cleared by federal officials and that all mail ballots be tracked by USPS. Envelopes must also be reviewed by the Postal Service.
"Unique ballot envelope identifiers, such as bar codes, enable confirmation that only citizens receive and cast ballots, reducing the risk of fraud and protecting the integrity of Federal elections," the order says.
This would be a significant change to how mail-in ballot programs are currently administered in American elections, which are largely carried out by state and local officials.
The Brennan Center for Justice, which advocates for expanded voting access and sued to block Trump's last elections order, said in a statement that the president "has no lawful authority to write the rules that govern our elections."
"Our government's citizenship lists are incomplete and inaccurate," the group said on X. "The United States Postal Service is overburdened and inadequate. This combines a car crash with a train wreck."
And the order also comes as Trump pressures Republicans in Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, a sweeping election overhaul that would impose new voter identification and documentation requirements.
That bill is stalled in the Senate due to Democratic opposition and the legislative filibuster.
The Supreme Court is also expected to rule this year on whether Mississippi should be allowed to count mail ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but received by election officials after Election Day. The legal challenge, which could have more sweeping implications for mail-in voting nationwide, was filed by the Republican National Committee and Trump's 2024 presidential campaign.
Federal agents stand guard outside of a federal building and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center in downtown Los Angeles during a demonstration in June.
(
Spencer Platt
/
Getty Images
)
Topline:
Federal immigration officials arrested more than 14,000 people in the greater Los Angeles area in 2025 — the majority of whom had no criminal record, according to an LAist analysis of new data from the Deportation Data Project.
What’s new: In 2025, federal officials arrested 14,394 people, up from 4,681 the year prior. Forty-six percent of people arrested had criminal convictions, 15% had pending charges and 39% had no criminal charges or convictions.
Why it matters: Federal officials have highlighted the arrests of the “worst of the worst” in the immigration raids that began in June, including "murderers, kidnappers, sexual predators and armed carjackers,” but haven’t published the details of the number of people who had criminal records.
Federal immigration officials arrested more than 14,000 people in the greater Los Angeles area in 2025 — the majority of whom had no criminal record, according to an LAist analysis of new data from the Deportation Data Project.
The data project, an initiative between UCLA and UC Berkeley, publishes federal data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.
In 2025, federal officials arrested 14,394 people, up from 4,681 the year prior. Forty-six percent of people arrested had criminal convictions, 15% had pending charges, and 39% had no criminal charges or convictions.
In a December news release, the Department of Homeland Security said it had arrested more than 10,000 people in the L.A. area since immigration raids began in June of last year, including "murderers, kidnappers, sexual predators and armed carjackers,” but did not publish details of the number of people who had criminal records.
The data from the Deportation Data Project shows that arrests in L.A. spiked in June, and about two-thirds of people arrested that month had no criminal convictions.
More than 313,000 people were arrested by ICE nationwide in 2025, according to an LAist analysis.
In a statement, a DHS spokesperson said the agency has not “verified the accuracy, methodology or analysis of the project and its results” and said “this only reveals how data is manipulated to peddle the false narrative that DHS is not targeting the worst of the worst.” The spokesperson said 61% of people ICE arrested across the country either had criminal convictions or pending charges.
The agency has regularly published press releases identifying people they have arrested and who they have called “the worst of the worst,” including from the raids in L.A. in June. But an LAist investigation and reporting from other outlets has found that some of the people on those lists already has been in custody and were serving lengthy sentences.
Keep up with LAist.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
Like many vendors along the El Salvador Corridor in Pico Union, Maria Godoy sells goods alongside others on the sidewalk of Vermont Avenue between 11th and 12th streets.
(
Gary Coronado / For The LA Local
)
Topline:
Small businesses struggling financially in the neighborhoods of the neighborhoods of Koreatown, Pico Union, Westlake, MacArthur Park and Highland Park could qualify for to help pay the bills.
About the grants: Individual brick-and-mortar businesses can qualify for grants ranging from $5,000 to $10,000, while street vendors can receive about $3,000, according to city officials. A total of $400,000 is available through the program, and applications are now open. Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez announced the program’s goal, describing it as a way to support locally owned businesses navigating rising operating costs, shifting customer patterns, and the impacts of recent wide-scale events, like the ongoing immigration raids, along with wildfires, and broader economic uncertainty.
Who is eligible: To qualify, businesses must have a valid Los Angeles business license and have been operating in Council District 1 since December 2020, with some flexibility for street vendors. They also need to show they’ve been financially impacted by any largescale events, like the COVID pandemic, immigration enforcement, or the broader economy. Funding will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis, with applications remaining open until funds run out.
Read on . . . for information on how to apply.
Small businesses struggling financially have another program they could qualify for to help pay the bills.
The program is for businesses in Council District 1, which includes the neighborhoods of Koreatown, Pico Union, Westlake, MacArthur Park and Highland Park.
Individual brick-and-mortar businesses can qualify for grants ranging from $5,000 to $10,000, while street vendors can receive about $3,000, according to city officials. A total of $400,000 is available through the program, and applications are now open.
Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez announced the program’s goal, describing it as a way to support locally owned businesses navigating rising operating costs, shifting customer patterns, and the impacts of recent wide-scale events, like the ongoing immigration raids, along with wildfires, and broader economic uncertainty.
Small businesses struggling financially have another program they could qualify for to help pay the bills.
Who is eligible?
The program is open to independently owned businesses and street vendors located within District 1.
To qualify, businesses must have a valid Los Angeles business license and have been operating in Council District 1 since December 2020, with some flexibility for street vendors. They also need to show they’ve been financially impacted by any largescale events, like the COVID pandemic, immigration enforcement, or the broader economy. Businesses that changed owners can also apply if they’re essentially running the same operation.
How can the money be used?
Grants can be used for daily operational expenses, including rent, payroll, utilities, overhead and other business costs. Roochnik said the funding could also help businesses cover missed rent payments.
Who is running the program?
The grants will be distributed in partnership with the PACE Business Development Center and New Economics for Women. The two organizations provide support to small and immigrant-owned businesses across Los Angeles.
How will recipients be selected?
Funding will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis, with applications remaining open until funds run out, Roochnik said.
What’s the goal?
Hernandez said the program is meant to help stabilize neighborhoods that have been affected by immigration enforcement and economic hardships.
“These small businesses are the backbone of our neighborhoods,” she said, adding the funding is meant to help them “stay open, keep workers employed, and continue serving our communities.”
Naomi Villagomez Roochnik, CD1 communications director, said the announcement was made during a press conference at Delicias Bakery and Some, a longtime Latina-owned business in Highland Park. The neighborhood has experienced significant rising rents due to gentrification and the location was meant to highlight the kinds of businesses the program is meant to support.
Is this a one-time program or part of a larger effort?
The grant is part of a pilot program, with the possibility of it expanding depending on demand and outcomes. The council office has launched similar aid efforts in the past, Roochnik said, such as food distribution and rental assistance.
Businesses that may not qualify for this specific grant can be connected to other resources, according to Roochnik, including the city’s legacy business program, which is for businesses operating for at least 20 years.
U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon ruled Tuesday that construction on President Trump's White House ballroom "must stop until Congress authorizes its completion."
About the lawsuit: Using a notable number of exclamation points, Leon said the plaintiff, the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States, is likely to succeed in their lawsuit and therefore he is granting a preliminary injunction to halt construction. "The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!" Leon wrote.
The backstory: A long-time dream project for President Trump, the ballroom is designed to seat 1,000 guests and will cost at least $300 million, according to estimates by the president. It has generated massive controversy and public pushback, but recently got approval from the Commission of Fine Arts, an architectural review panel now packed with Trump allies. The commission voted to give it a final signoff despite not seeing the final design. It had received more than 2,000 public comments, which according to staff were 99% negative.
What's next: The National Capital Planning Commission is set to vote on the ballroom project during a meeting on Thursday. Leon said he will delay the enforcement of the injunction for 14 days because he expects the administration to appeal immediately. He also said he would allow construction to continue for "the safety and security of the White House" – a clear reference to the secure bunker being constructed under the building.
Using a notable number of exclamation points, Leon said the plaintiff, the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States, is likely to succeed in their lawsuit and therefore he is granting a preliminary injunction to halt construction.
"The President of the United States is the steward of the White House for future generations of First Families. He is not, however, the owner!" Leon wrote.
Leon said however that he will delay the enforcement of the injunction for 14 days because he expects the administration to appeal immediately. He also said he would allow construction to continue for "the safety and security of the White House" – a clear reference to the secure bunker being constructed under the building.
A long-time dream project for President Trump, the ballroom is designed to seat 1,000 guests and will cost at least $300 million, according to estimates by the president. It has generated massive controversy and public pushback, but recently got approval from the Commission of Fine Arts, an architectural review panel now packed with Trump allies. The commission voted to give it a final signoff despite not seeing the final design. It had received more than 2,000 public comments, which according to staff were 99% negative.
The National Capital Planning Commission is set to vote on the ballroom project during a meeting on Thursday.
President Trump responded to the ruling in a social media post complaining that the National Trust for Historic Preservation doesn't appreciate his efforts at "sprucing up" Washington's buildings from the White House to the Kennedy Center.
"So, the White House Ballroom, and The Trump Kennedy Center, which are under budget, ahead of schedule, and will be among the most magnificent Buildings of their kind anywhere in the World, gets sued by a group that was cut off by Government years ago, but all of the many DISASTERS in our Country are left alone to die. Doesn't make much sense, does it?" he wrote.
Leon had previously allowed the construction to continue in a February ruling. In that filing, the National Trust for Historic Preservation argued the president hadn't followed proper procedure in tearing down the East Wing of the White House and soliciting private donations to fund the $300-million ballroom.
In that February opinion, Leon wrote that he wasn't making a determination on the merits because of the way the suit had been framed. He concluded, saying that if the group were to amend its complaint "the Court will expeditiously consider it and, if viable, address the merits of the novel and weighty issues presented."
